free. free. free bird video for your media project free video dog r t v dot com. secret lover tour. was able to build the world's most sophisticated robot which on fortunately doesn't give a darn about anything to mission to teach creation why it should care about humans in the world this is why you should care only on the dog com. hello and welcome to crossfire all things considered i'm peter lavelle the saga of

edward snowden a whistle blowing hero to millions around the world washington calls him a very dangerous security liability and a threat whatever its fate one thing appears to be clear snowden justifies his actions in the name of transparency in the need to have a public debate on the surveillance state and disregard as he succeeded. to cross the fate of edward snowden i'm joined by my guests in washington mark weiss broad he is co-director of the center for economic and policy research and we also have aureole right now he is a fellow at the treatment national security project right gentlemen cross-talk rules and i think that means you can jump in anytime you want are if i go to you in washington you know you can agree or disagree with what with mr snowden has done as we are talking right now he's still apparently in a moscow airport but has he furthered what he wanted a debate on national security. well i think there's no question that he sparked

a pretty intense debate both in the united states and around the world about the nature of government surveillance about the role of the n.s.a. in particular but i also think it's pretty clear that the longer he goes out on the lam so to speak and particularly the places he's going or purported to going china russia cuba these are not places that are known for internet freedom so to speak either so i know you hear that goes i always hear that i mean internet freedom is not really interrupted here in russia but it's said all the time over and over again so there's no evidence that he's going to be saying that they should let me do that he certainly did it and it really is no evidence that he's met with russian officials he's not even entered the country so we'll see what that means you want to reply you know just a little matter if just to correct it on the record or you know ecuador has vastly i think they've had one of the fastest rates of growth of internet anywhere in the hemisphere. since korea has been in office and there's absolutely no monitor

there's no censorship of internet and no evidence that the government is doing any kind of monitoring so you can definitely ecuador out of any list of countries that you think is not a pioneer of internet freedom ok so that was a mistake or i do want to reply to that. sheriff is that not well versed in ecuadorian internet policy the simple point i'm trying to make is. certainly from the american public's perspective what for many was was an important debate that has been sparked the longer he he goes out in this way sort of hodgepodge in around the world in places that to most americans certainly in terms of china and russia aren't necessarily seen as beacons of freedom in general yeah but it's the united states apparently this really national security policy has broken the law and spying on its citizens so what kind of beacon is that. well it's not clear from

anything that mr snowden as a rule least not here to defend the american government but it's not clear that he's he's exposed lawbreaking it's pretty clear he's exposed a pretty thorough surveillance program that has been in accordance with the law as best i can tell he's from what he's released ok more. different issues there's no debate on it so how do we know about the legality of it and what people are doing if you can't debate it publicly well it certainly has legal means i mean it is debated in congress it has a court system again i think it. doesn't recognize that it's all secret though mark in washington go ahead. yeah i think that's a good point we're talking about a secret surveillance program targeting tens of millions of americans we're talking about secret court decisions fights a court opinion that going and greenwald has written about and you know how do we even know i mean all we know is that we're being kept in the dark on policies that

the american people would never vote for except or even their representatives would have trouble voting for eric setting and still getting reelected so this is pretty serious and of course the spying on the rest of the world citizens the germans are not very happy about the europeans not happy about that so these are serious offenses and this whole issue of you know what countries does he go to i mean that's really a red herring i don't see that has to do with any i mean has anybody condemned the thousands the tens of thousands of salvadorans that came to united states fleeing murder and repression what it was the united states government that was training and arming and supplying the people that were killing them i mean they came to the united states because that was a place they could get away you know not because the united states was somehow better than the government that they were fleeing so this really has and that's that's been true for all kinds of refugees who have come here from chile after the

united states helped overthrow the government there so people who are likely if you're president of the united nations done bad things around the world ok ari i mean it let's go back to the countries you know it's not my point my point is no other point is a different point my point is that these people who say it's ironic that he goes to china or he goes to venezuela or whatever country they don't like that's really irrelevant because if you're a refugee you go to the country that's going to not turn you over to the government that's trying to persecute you and that's what people do and they come to the united states even if the united states is actually the sources. their problem if they can get away with it already if you want to reply to the. i'm happy to reply to it i'm making a very simple point which is we were talking about the public debate particularly public debate in the united states i think there's no question whether it's has any bearing on the facts is a different question but there's no question for many americans nearly the place

that he is gone china and russia raise questions i'm not saying he's wrong to go there i'm not saying it doesn't make sense for him to go there but when you're talking about the debate here i think the longer i do you think why do you think we have made that she hated the why do you think the debate is that way that ok i mean people feel that well either they don't kind of wings because i mean it's really interesting if you will i mean if you it's really interesting if you look at it because you know he supplied evidence that the americans were spying on hong kong on china and on the you know on russia ok and he goes to those places that you know you expect these governments to be friendly to the united states after the. well let's let's be honest here i mean the russian spy and the americans the russian spy and the chinese the chinese spy and the americans the china american spy in the chain all these countries are spying on each other they didn't know where he was and he got to let everybody that they're responding the americans are spying on everyone's we've done nothing wrong it's expose that well according to american law i broke the law it's useful to have

a public debate but from an american perspective we certainly broke the law for certainly from the perspective the american government as a matter of principle when you look at it from a government perspective all these governments spy on each other it's not a surprise to any of them none of them have a particular claim to morality when it comes to spying and what it claims to human rights none of them have a particular claim to morality either i would say that russia and china are probably on the bottom of that list among major world powers ok after iraq after. the bottom of that it's going to have to. go on and on i could go on and on with american foreign policy since the civil war ok but we don't have that much time go ahead mark. we we can all go i think that policy should be done i mean it's a headline ari's ari's point about everybody spying on each other is true and that actually makes no bones case because all these people who are saying well snowden released information that was harmful to the united states because he revealed that

for example that the united states was spying on russia or spying on china or hacking into universities and places like that well you know they already knew that yeah but he knows that so all he did really the reason they want to get him and throw him in jail for the rest of his life is not because he gave the world any information that helps other governments he didn't do that he gave the world information that shows what the united states is doing to its own citizens that what they wanted to keep in the dark to keep from us that's why they're persecuting him and in terms of crimes well you could possibly argue that he broke the law. in terms of release of classified information although even there it's pretty hazy because look at bob woodward's books for example i mean that's all based on people leaking classified information to him and nobody gets prosecuted they only get prosecuted when it's something embarrassing to the u.s. government something that they want to keep from us something that they want to

hide from us so even there you know it would be a kind of selective prosecution that's why a lot of people have criticized president obama for being the for having used the espionage act. you know now the eighth time twice as many as all previous presidents combined in the prosecution of whistleblowers so these are some of the issues here and it's really you know what really gives any country good reason to give asylum. snowden is that they're using the espionage act at all let me ask you this question clearly he did not engage in espionage ok go ahead this is crosstalk are you going to jump in let me ask you this question. let me ask you this question mark if if edward snowden is really standing on principle and i don't know his motivations i don't think any of us really know his motivations but nevertheless if he's really standing on

principle and what he cares about is really exposing the truth why should he come back to the united states go on trial and really stand up for what he's done if public opinion is so behind him why would that be a good thing for him to do ok besides the torture of. manning going it's pretty clear they're not going to return it to him. well they did i mean everything they did to me because i'm going to i'm trying no you asked him a question a little bouncer it going. yeah well first of all they're not necessarily going to try him for the civil year saying committed civil disobedience therefore i mean i've done that myself people anybody who's been arrested in a sit in you know their civil disobedience so when you do that you're arguing you know you should you don't do the crime if you don't want to do the time well great but that's not the time he's going to do he's not going to be tried we already know that he's being charged under the espionage act which carries a potential life imprisonment ok he didn't do anything like that so yeah he has

every reason in the world not to want to spend the rest of his life in jail for something you didn't do he'd be stupid to come back here ok ari real quick before we go to the break. well look it's a simple matter of fact either he stands on principle or he doesn't stand on principle yes many people in washington week thinks he took off with a whole bunch of government documents way beyond what your average leaker pretty much anyone else in history of the possibility exception of assad has taken off with again i think it's a useful public debate to have and i think you saw. that i don't think he's a prince of human rights and i don't think he's the big grand founder of freedom of everyone it's unclear what he is i think that's the reality we don't know his motivations we don't know what he has we don't know he's leaked we don't even really know where he is going to find out gentlemen to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on edward snowden stay.

wealthy british style. market. why no one should really be happening to the global economy

with mike stronger no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into the report. speak your language. news programs and documentaries in spanish matters to you breaking news a little turn to angles the stories. you hear. the spanish find out more visit.

welcome back to cross talk where all things are considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing the fate of edward snowden. ok or if i go back to you i mean that has. been committed here snowden really

guilty of that in your mind because he didn't give it to governments he did he gave it to the people who gave it to media he didn't sell it he's not threatening any other use of it that i'm aware of is that espionage. it's unclear to me what he's done he's obviously has given it to reporters he may have given it to governments that i'm unaware of and he certainly weakening on a level. that it's not and reasonable to me that the government would attempt to try him under arrest i'm not a lawyer i don't know the legal definition but as a matter of fact i mean if you look at it from the american government's perspective when you reveal that much classified information it's useful to be able to throw the book at you so to speak and espionage would the potential damage she's doing american national security is pretty pretty strong i think it's reasonable for them to explore those those charges again he'd have to be convicted in the court of law we have the rule here and he have the right to defend himself it's not clear to me that he's committed it but i think it's reasonable to look at those

types of charges are if i can show you what do you would damage to american national security committed in your mind i can't see any really won't well look what i said before that everyone spies and everyone i think that's known the sources and methods so to speak of intelligence are something that all governments clear it carefully guard you know and i think the reality of what he's doing potentially. tips off a lot of people around the world state and non-state actors alike and it's also possible of course that he's you know he took a pretty clear he took quite a lot of classified information that he's been in china now in russia it appears he may be. passing that on to governments it's simply unaware of it but i think that's something that if you had a government that how would those how would that advance his goals to be a traitor is i wouldn't he want to be known as a traitor. i mean i don't know his goals i think i think i think the best the best we can say about his goals are he's clearly someone who has

a commitment to the libertarian principles to the idea of transparency he's also probably someone who's is a bit narcissistic you don't do something like this ok with me to the room narcissism so i'm clear he needs to be very clear what is going to continue this smear go ahead mark i don't think it's a smear i think it's a psychological profile of people who require large amounts of information go ahead mark. yeah i mean i don't really care about the psychological profiling this is typical it's done with everybody who who has been involved in any i mean look at all the stuff they did to a son for example and he wasn't even a leak he didn't even leak and he was just the journalist that provided the information and they want to criminalize the journalism too you can see the threats they've made against going greenwald but in terms of espionage i mean we can dismiss this rather quickly we know what he's released because you can read it in the guardian in the washington post and the press so that's what he's released now he may have more than that but if he hasn't released it and according to glenn

greenwald he made a specific arrangement with the media outlets that he dealt with. to not release anything that would be harmful to us curity and so far we don't have anything like that no he says well he may have talked to the russians or given something or you know he may have sold them things too but he didn't and we don't have any evidence that normally in a legal system you charge somebody with a crime that you have some reason to believe they did not that they had the possibility or the opportunity to have done so this was done for political reasons he's being charged with espionage and you know it's very interesting the whole case is quite fascinating because it has so many ramifications you know there's all these cold war implications for example we don't have the cold war anymore you know and so they're trying to make this into a guy who's collaborating with enemy states you know in ecuador support of treated in south america i mean any one of these countries would give him asylum any one of

them would have given a songe asylum you know any of the left governments in south america brazil argentina than a swirl ecuador bolivia ordered what i mean that's the state of south america so are they enemies too well for the washington post editorial board in the story was yeah those are enemy states they're still fighting the cold war so this whole thing is being framed in terms of a cold war that doesn't even exist he's the so that's why they charged with espionage because they wanted. create that framework they want to portray him as a spy they want to portray him as a traitor and they actually made their case for extradition much harder because the church makes it most clearly a case of political persecution you know if they had simply charged him with taking classified information again it could be selective prosecution but they would have a better case to make to any other government to extradite him but now they don't but they were willing to sacrifice that they were willing to do other things they never do in these cases for example just in order to win the public relations war

for example releasing these charges before they had him in custody is something that would normally do why they do it because they saw a debate going on in the u.s. which they don't want to have and the debate was about surveillance the debate was about some of it about privacy the bait was about you know what are they doing to american citizens and that's not to debate they want to have they want to debate about where snowden why can't we get him why doesn't russia and china there's going to be consequences kerry says you know to russia i mean this is all very very smart diplomatic and i must tell you mark really nobody here is going to read about american threats ok over this case at all ok and all you get either is china either is or anyone else let. me respond to this yet please let me let me say two things i agree i think what snowden is has released on surveillance has sparked an important public debate i think it's important public debate here and i think it's an important public debate around the world everywhere faces this

this issue of what is the internet and what is technology in general mean for surveillance and for public information on the issue that the obama administration wants to relaunch a cold war here and in latin america look i worked in the obama administration state department no one has an interest in riyadh in the cold war we want good relations with russia we want good relations with china a number of the countries you mention in latin america we consider strategic. partners brazil foremost among them or a lot on brazil policy so i don't think the broader characterization of what the government is trying to do which is you know if i understand mark or actually is is reignite a cold war in order to tamp down really i didn't say they were trying to really haul mr valence i mean so they're trying to launch a war using this sort of cold war rhetoric i mean again i don't know i mean it would be russia using it he did order to frame this you know when russia china has mentioned this bait it's always an order to make him into a traitor that's what they're doing you know in terms of the i think that i think

that i really like reality for a lot of war. mark go ahead well you know again i don't think they intend to have to seriously damage relations with russia and china over this i mean they are saying things that could do that but i don't think they're going to want to do that and i don't think the chinese are russians eventually are going to see it their way so no i'm not saying they're trying to relaunch the cold war all i was saying is that they're trying to use a cold war rather outdated cold war framework in order to portray this as a case of espionage and treason and that's what they're doing there now let america it's a different story if you look at you know the obama administration's policy towards latin america it has very much been a kind of cold war policy the attacks on venezuela the overthrow of the government of on doris for example in two thousand and nine which the united states government had an enormous role in helping that coup succeed in the gym aiding the coup

government i mean these are these are actions that are very much done with the idea that we want to really get rid of the left government even supported the coup the parliamentary cool and part of why last year and the of course the the bush administration did other things as well the attempted overthrow of the venezuelan there's been perfect continuity between the bush and the obama administration on latin america and the general policy is they don't want any of you know they pretend to like the brazilian government because it's too big but if you actually look at what they've done there in two thousand and five they actually tried to they organize an attempt to weaken the workers' party government through the state department and we got documents on there from the freedom of information act so they don't really like any of the left government and they do see the whole region as a model of you know little and they were getting a little far afield here if i go to ari i mean kerry secretary of state kerry said

people may die because of snowden. what's that all about. i think from i would say this again i i think what snowden done is important level i think it's also pretty clear that you know when you when you governments in general including the american governments have an important role to play in national security some of that requires secrecy it's certainly true all governments around the world look at it that way including the governments to which snowden has gone. when you reveal information it has potential for negative consequences certainly in the case of wiki leaks. the leaks had negative consequences all those people who had been talking to the american government a number of them human rights workers were revealed to their own governments for talking in a number of them suffered as a result so i think i think there are positive consequences or negative consequences to what snowden has done and it's pretty clear that there are potential negative consequences including potential security consequences on terms

of what kerry said you know i don't know what he's basing they know but already i think that notion no it isn't proven that the u.s. government has lied to the american people right about espionage of the american people i don't know it's pretty clear i don't know if snowden has proven that the u.s. government has lied to the american people in one of the traitor where as you probably know only someone. needs to be calling him a traitor for he was just a common thief. ok marc i'm going to be the last word in the program you know. yeah i just want to respond something that ari said because i don't think there's any evidence that i've seen any evidence that anybody was harmed any americans were harmed or anyone else actually. as a result of what wiki leaks revealed so that's news to me and but no i mean this isn't really the issue it's not really a security issue at all none of this has to do i mean even the whole war on terror is think how grossly exaggerated that is and that's of the bait i think the government doesn't want to have you know there's been about thirteen fourteen

people killed by terrorism in the united states since that since september eleventh and you know you're much more likely to be so killed by lightning so how much of our liberties do we want to sacrifice for a risk that is is so minimal that they don't want to have that debate either and so really this is this is really exposed our government like all right just like what we're doing but we had a debate on this program we brought out of time many thanks my guest today in washington thanks to our viewers for watching us here arche see you next time and remember prost on. the scene. as.

well. this month high tech means good health whether it be the latest please or cutters on lifesaving heart valves innovators are working hard to keep you healthy for some companies it's been a winding road from car simulators to cutting edge streaming systems. others it's been a lifetime of work along the mysteries of the skull check it all out on technology update we've got the future covered. choose your language. of holy week over the influential going to say still some of the. treatments that use the consensus here to. choose the opinions that you've been great to. choose the stories that impact your life choose me access to your office or.

more news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. trying to corporations are all today. live. live. live. live

live. live .

edward snowden remains in moscow for now sitting tight in an airport transit zone after president vladimir putin rejected all u.s. threats of demands for the whistleblower to be extradited. meanwhile washington accused of trying to shoot the messenger by presenting snowden as a dangerous while ignoring fallout from the revelation of its five program. britain embraces five more years of austerity as the chancellor announces a new government budget cuts for the eleven and a half billion pounds leaving the most vulnerable at risk.